Death penalty for voter fraud

haymarket said:

In this case - it certainly is part of it. And the main idea here is that somebody has proposed the ultimate penalty for a non capital crime and we have no evidence that it is any kind of significant problem.

The zealots on the right have been exposed on this. They have nothing except their own desire to suppress the vote to win elections for Republicans.

Click to expand...

No. The OP made no claims regarding how often voter fraud occurs.

haymarket said:

Really now?! One case of voter fraud is irrelevant. A million cases is one serious national problem

Click to expand...

You're right. If there's one murder per year, we shouldn't even discuss how it should be punished, let alone actually punish it. We should wait until millions of people are murdering each other before we discuss appropriate punishment.[/sarcasm]

I said "yes," though I'd support other strong penalties, such as twenty years at hard labor for minor offenses.

If you're going to have a republic, and make the individual citizens the ultimate level of government, then voter fraud, or more correctly election fraud has to be seen as tantamount to treason in war. Both are committed for the purpose of overthrowing the government and the sovereignty of the People.

We send young people to die to protect our system and way of life. We have to be ready and willing to sacrifice the lives of criminal subversives too, or we're morally rotten.

Rainman05 said:

I think those who do voter fraud have their electoral rights removed and spend up to 1 year in prison. But the electoral rights removal part is for life.

I disapprove of the death penalty universally, for anything, except treason or high treason.

Click to expand...

What is the difference exactly between overthrowing the government with treason, and overthrowing it with fake voes, if in the end, the result is pretty much the same?

Oftencold said:

What is the difference exactly between overthrowing the government with treason, and overthrowing it with fake voes, if in the end, the result is pretty much the same?

Click to expand...

Overthrowing it with treason implies:
-betrayal of the traitors' oaths. Also, you betray the trust of the people who put you in office (the country)
-violence -> you opened the gates and the barbarians sacked the city
-loss of independence through force. the people are no longer represented at all because the ruling government is a different one (say, beijing)
-etc.

Changing the government through votes means that unless all the votes that overthrew the government were forged, which doesn't happen, a popular opinion is still represented.
So if you had a referendum, and the outcome was 51 to 49, even if 2/51 was forged, you still had a pretty large group of people who wanted to vote one way or the other. And it doesn't imply violence. And unless the forgery was done by the government itself, there is no betrayal of trust, no betrayal of oath and public duty.

So yeah. There is a big difference. Sure, the outcome is the same, but the means and the implications vary greatly.

Overall, the death sentence is a barbaric method. It is also unchristian if you happen to be a devout Christian, you shouldn't support it for any crime except treason. Because treason supercedes religion. It goes against nature. Evolution itself despises treason and that's why you don't see treason in the animal kingdom. So a traitor can no longer be considered human. Just a monster.

Federalist said:

No. The OP made no claims regarding how often voter fraud occurs.

Click to expand...

Bravo! You finally see its fundamental problem.

Rainman05 said:

Overthrowing it with treason implies:
-betrayal of the traitors' oaths. Also, you betray the trust of the people who put you in office (the country)
-violence -> you opened the gates and the barbarians sacked the city
-loss of independence through force. the people are no longer represented at all because the ruling government is a different one (say, beijing)
-etc.

Changing the government through votes means that unless all the votes that overthrew the government were forged, which doesn't happen, a popular opinion is still represented.
So if you had a referendum, and the outcome was 51 to 49, even if 2/51 was forged, you still had a pretty large group of people who wanted to vote one way or the other. And it doesn't imply violence. And unless the forgery was done by the government itself, there is no betrayal of trust, no betrayal of oath and public duty.

So yeah. There is a big difference. Sure, the outcome is the same, but the means and the implications vary greatly.

Click to expand...

I don't get it. Your first point on betrayal is the whole point of voter fraud, to bypass having people put you in office legitimately. If the purpose of voter fraud isn't to rig the outcome of an election, then what is the purpose of it?

Rainman05 said:

Overall, the death sentence is a barbaric method. It is also unchristian if you happen to be a devout Christian, you shouldn't support it for any crime except treason. Because treason supercedes religion. It goes against nature. Evolution itself despises treason and that's why you don't see treason in the animal kingdom. So a traitor can no longer be considered human. Just a monster.

Click to expand...

1. Death sentence is very Christian. Did you skip the old testament and go straight for the new? Go check out Deuteronomy, then come back and tell us all how unchristian it is to kill people.
2. You absolutely see treason in the animal kingdom. Don't you ever watch Nat Geo? Monkeys stage organised coups against each other, and lets not even get started on wolves, lions etc. They don't come to be the Alpha Male through democratic elections.

HumanBeing said:

You're right. If there's one murder per year, we shouldn't even discuss how it should be punished, let alone actually punish it. We should wait until millions of people are murdering each other before we discuss appropriate punishment.[/sarcasm]

Click to expand...

You just committed the fallacy of FALSE EQUIVALENCY. Or in your mind is a single act of voter fraud equally as heinous as the murder of an innocent person?

haymarket said:

You just committed the fallacy of FALSE EQUIVALENCY. Or in your mind is a single act of voter fraud equally as heinous as the murder of an innocent person?

Click to expand...

No, it isn't, that's why it deserves it's own laws, and warrants it's own topic of conversation. It isn't a false equivalency, it's a simple comparison to show the complete and utter irrelevance of your ongoing question of the general scale of voter fraud. You're saying that discussion of criminal punishment is only warranted if the crime is already being committed on a mass scale, yet when you apply the same logic to any other crime, like murder, you quickly see how illogical it is.

Rainman05 said:

Overthrowing it with treason implies:
-betrayal of the traitors' oaths. Also, you betray the trust of the people who put you in office (the country)
-violence -> you opened the gates and the barbarians sacked the city
-loss of independence through force. the people are no longer represented at all because the ruling government is a different one (say, beijing)
-etc.

Changing the government through votes means that unless all the votes that overthrew the government were forged, which doesn't happen, a popular opinion is still represented.
So if you had a referendum, and the outcome was 51 to 49, even if 2/51 was forged, you still had a pretty large group of people who wanted to vote one way or the other. And it doesn't imply violence. And unless the forgery was done by the government itself, there is no betrayal of trust, no betrayal of oath and public duty.

So yeah. There is a big difference. Sure, the outcome is the same, but the means and the implications vary greatly.

Overall, the death sentence is a barbaric method. It is also unchristian if you happen to be a devout Christian, you shouldn't support it for any crime except treason. Because treason supercedes religion. It goes against nature. Evolution itself despises treason and that's why you don't see treason in the animal kingdom. So a traitor can no longer be considered human. Just a monster.

Click to expand...

All official actions of government aside from a few minor and ceremonial ones are empowered by the threat of deadly force, whether parking fines or a foreign invasion, there's somebody with a gun there to make sure that we comply.

When we vote to enforce our will against neighbors who object, we are empowering armed individuals to kill them if the resist sufficiently. We just pretty it up and don't look too closely. We may start with a fine, for instance, but if they don't want to pay, we send somebody with a gun to make them comply or take them to jail. If they flee, they may be shot, that's why the cops have guns.

That's the power a fraudulent voter wields outside the cover of law. they should be treated as though they tried to compel others with a gun, or succeeded in doing so, Because that's exactly what they did.

HumanBeing said:

No, it isn't, that's why it deserves it's own laws, and warrants it's own topic of conversation. It isn't a false equivalency, it's a simple comparison to show the complete and utter irrelevance of your ongoing question of the general scale of voter fraud. You're saying that discussion of criminal punishment is only warranted if the crime is already being committed on a mass scale, yet when you apply the same logic to any other crime, like murder, you quickly see how illogical it is.

Click to expand...

you compared voter fraud to murder. That is indeed employing the fallacy of False Equivalence.

You did not apply any logic at all. What you applied was the direct opposite.

HumanBeing said:

I don't get it. Your first point on betrayal is the whole point of voter fraud, to bypass having people put you in office legitimately. If the purpose of voter fraud isn't to rig the outcome of an election, then what is the purpose of it?


1. Death sentence is very Christian. Did you skip the old testament and go straight for the new? Go check out Deuteronomy, then come back and tell us all how unchristian it is to kill people.
2. You absolutely see treason in the animal kingdom. Don't you ever watch Nat Geo? Monkeys stage organised coups against each other, and lets not even get started on wolves, lions etc. They don't come to be the Alpha Male through democratic elections.

Click to expand...

Again, if you have 100 people in a room. All have to vote. 2 people say they won't and someone hears them. he casts 3 votes, 2 frauded in their name. The end: 51 to 49. You still have 49 to 49 without the frauded votes. It means that at least 49% of the people actually do want an option or the other. You, the voter, even the one who did fraud, aren't a traitor, just a fraud.

But treason would be the guy who counts, taking an oath to serve his job faithfully, decides to say it was 51 to 49 in favor of what he wanted, regardless of what the outcome was. It's like the votes didn't matter. that's treason.

Get the difference?

1. Old testament is judaism. Christianity begins at the new testament. You can't validate Christianity on the old testament alone and Jesus was pretty big on forgiveness, even on those who wronged you dearly.

2. Again, that's not treason. Chimps in a group do organize to overthrow a leader. But that's just like we have elections. A change in leadership by popular opinion. It's bestiocracy really.

haymarket said:

Bravo! You finally see its fundamental problem.

Click to expand...

Nope. The OP asked how people thought a person who commits voter fraud ought to be punished. The OP made no statement about the frequency of voter fraud.

Oftencold said:

I said "yes," though I'd support other strong penalties, such as twenty years at hard labor for minor offenses.

If you're going to have a republic, and make the individual citizens the ultimate level of government, then voter fraud, or more correctly election fraud has to be seen as tantamount to treason in war. Both are committed for the purpose of overthrowing the government and the sovereignty of the People.

We send young people to die to protect our system and way of life. We have to be ready and willing to sacrifice the lives of criminal subversives too, or we're morally rotten.

Click to expand...

Election fraud is a different subject and I agree it should be dealt with very harshly, though the death penalty might be a little overboard.

Rainman05 said:

1. Old testament is judaism. Christianity begins at the new testament. You can't validate Christianity on the old testament alone and Jesus was pretty big on forgiveness, even on those who wronged you dearly.

Click to expand...

Uh, what? I've never in my life heard anyone claim that "Christianity begins at the new testament". Jesus orders Christians to follow the Law of Moses in the Old Testament: "Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law". It's very explicit about the whole thing. Jews believe in the old testament, Christians believe in the original and the sequel. I honestly never even thought for a moment that I'd ever end up debating that, it's simple well documented fact.

Rainman05 said:

2. Again, that's not treason. Chimps in a group do organize to overthrow a leader. But that's just like we have elections. A change in leadership by popular opinion. It's bestiocracy really.

Click to expand...

Nope, they frequently do it through brutal violence and occasionally murder.

haymarket said:

you compared voter fraud to murder. That is indeed employing the fallacy of False Equivalence.

You did not apply any logic at all. What you applied was the direct opposite.

Click to expand...

Honestly, I get the impression your ignorance is just a deliberate facade. You're saying in this thread that we shouldn't discuss punishment for voter fraud unless we can prove that it's widespread, but you don't support using the same logic for other crimes, and you claim not to understand why that's relevant and why it shows a total contradiction in your logic (or lack thereof). It's beyond ridiculous.

Rainman05 said:

Again, if you have 100 people in a room. All have to vote. 2 people say they won't and someone hears them. he casts 3 votes, 2 frauded in their name. The end: 51 to 49. You still have 49 to 49 without the frauded votes. It means that at least 49% of the people actually do want an option or the other. You, the voter, even the one who did fraud, aren't a traitor, just a fraud.

Click to expand...

It's an attempt at being a traitor. You're simply giving an example where voter fraud is unsuccessful in its end goal.

You people confuse the hell out of me. I despise representitive democracy with every fiber of my being, it is the root of all modern political oppression, so why does it seem like I'm the only one who thinks a government who comes to power through fraud is even worse than a democratically elected government? How come you scream about how great democracy is, but when people try to pervert it to seize power, you talk about it like it's some victimless crime?

You need to get some consistency in your arguments. This whole thing is weak.

Federalist said:

Nope. The OP asked how people thought a person who commits voter fraud ought to be punished. The OP made no statement about the frequency of voter fraud.

Click to expand...

As I have repeatedly said.... and as you have repeatedly tried to pretend to ignore ..... the implicit premise of advocating the death penalty is because a certain behavior is so problematic for society that it must be dealt with using the harshest penalty available.

To pretend otherwise is playing ostrich.

HumanBeing said:

Honestly, I get the impression your ignorance is just a deliberate facade. You're saying in this thread that we shouldn't discuss punishment for voter fraud unless we can prove that it's widespread, but you don't support using the same logic for other crimes, and you claim not to understand why that's relevant and why it shows a total contradiction in your logic (or lack thereof). It's beyond ridiculous.

Click to expand...

What is supremely ridiculous about this thread is some persons actually playing with the ultimate sanction of the death penalty as a punishment without even offering to prove that there is such a problem that needs such a harsh penalty.

But since you love the word LOGIC so much, please, do inform us of the logic that equates an act of voter fraud with the taking of a human life. Do please give us the LOGIC of that equivalency.

haymarket said:

What is supremely ridiculous about this thread is some persons actually playing with the ultimate sanction of the death penalty as a punishment without even offering to prove that there is such a problem that needs such a harsh penalty.

But since you love the word LOGIC so much, please, do inform us of the logic that equates an act of voter fraud with the taking of a human life. Do please give us the LOGIC of that equivalency.

Click to expand...

I didn't equate one act to another, though I pointed out the common denominator between them (that they are both crimes). You are saying that discussion of punishment for crimes is only warranted when a substantial number of those crimes have already been proven to have been committed. I gave an example that demonstrated that even you don't actually believe what you're saying. When you use the same idea with other crimes, like murder, rape, theft, etc you will almost certainly admit that discussion of appropriate punishment is warranted even before there are any proven cases of them being committed, let alone on a mass scale.

haymarket said:

As I have repeatedly said.... and as you have repeatedly tried to pretend to ignore ..... the implicit premise of advocating the death penalty is because a certain behavior is so problematic for society that it must be dealt with using the harshest penalty available.

To pretend otherwise is playing ostrich.

Click to expand...

You can infer whatever you want. I simply pointed out that the OP made no claims regarding the frequency of voter fraud.

HumanBeing said:

I didn't equate one act to another, though I pointed out the common denominator between them (that they are both crimes). You are saying that discussion of punishment for crimes is only warranted when a substantial number of those crimes have already been proven to have been committed.

Click to expand...

Equating acts of voter fraud to murder is simply stupid. Yes, they are both crimes. So what?

How do you folks on the right expect to convince the rest of us that 'yes indeedy there is a problem that needs to be fixed' if you cannot intelligently present data to quantify that problem so that we know this is more than just very small potatoes?

Federalist said:

You can infer whatever you want. I simply pointed out that the OP made no claims regarding the frequency of voter fraud.

Click to expand...

Let me say this again and you tell me what you do not yet understand....

the existence of a problem that needs to be dealt with is implicit in the OP's drastic solution.

Got that after about the tenth time now? :doh

It is clear what is going on here. for the last few years you folks on the right have gotten your butts kicked on this issue when the subject gets around to data and proof. So now the word has gone out to avoid all such things at all costs ----- even if it makes you look stupid in the process. :roll:

haymarket said:

Let me say this again and you tell me what you do not yet understand....

the existence of a problem that needs to be dealt with is implicit in the OP's drastic solution.

Got that after about the tenth time now? :doh

It is clear what is going on here. for the last few years you folks on the right have gotten your butts kicked on this issue when the subject gets around to data and proof. So now the word has gone out to avoid all such things at all costs ----- even if it makes you look stupid in the process. :roll:

Click to expand...

Yes you keep saying that his question implies this or that.

I heard you the first hundred times.

But that doesn't change the FACT that the OP contains no claims as to the frequency of voter fraud.

Here is the OP:

Muhammed said:

So would you support capital punishment for people who commit voter fraud?

Please explain why or why not.

Click to expand...

Please highlight the claim made about the frequency of voter fraud or shut the **** up.

Federalist said:

Yes you keep saying that his question implies this or that.

I heard you the first hundred times.

But that doesn't change the FACT that the OP contains no claims as to the frequency of voter fraud.

Here is the OP:



Please highlight the claim made about the frequency of voter fraud or shut the **** up.

Click to expand...

You do understand that in the use of English language , one can imply something without coming right out and saying it?

And that is what was done with this.

The one that needs to shut up is the one playing ostrich. That way you avoid all the sand in your mouth.

But I love it that you keep beating a really dead horse since it continues to shine the spotlight on the absurdity of the OP and the utter impotence of your side to provide any real quantitive evidence that such a problem exists. Another twenty or so replies from you saying the same thing would be really a public service.

It is clear what is going on here. for the last few years you folks on the right have gotten your butts kicked on this issue when the subject gets around to data and proof. So now the word has gone out to avoid all such things at all costs ----- even if it makes you look stupid in the process. :roll:

But hey - you got a whopping 11% of the poll who bought into the stupid premise so that should be some sort of victory considering it is twenty times the level of libertarian support for something like president of the USA at election time. :lamo

haymarket said:

What is supremely ridiculous about this thread is some persons actually playing with the ultimate sanction of the death penalty as a punishment without even offering to prove that there is such a problem that needs such a harsh penalty.

But since you love the word LOGIC so much, please, do inform us of the logic that equates an act of voter fraud with the taking of a human life. Do please give us the LOGIC of that equivalency.

Click to expand...

If voter fraud becomes a capital crime...then I think that the next time my neighbor's kid chases after a runaway football into my yard, I get to use deadly force on the little booger machine.

haymarket said:

You do understand that in the use of English language , one can imply something without coming right out and saying it?

And that is what was done with this.

Click to expand...

I see. So in your opinion there was an implication. Well, I can't control what you infer from what others write.

However, the fact remains that the OP made no statement regarding the frequency of voter fraud. If you disagree, please provide the quote of the OP.